[CF-Devel] New Skill System (Draft - Magic system)

[Yann Chachkoff]

>
     
     ===== Original Message From Tim Rightnour <
      
      root at garbled.net
      
      > =====
     
     >
     
     On 20-Nov-02 Johnny Shelley wrote:
     
     >>
     
      The main problem is in how to deal with the magic system and schools. I
     
     >>
     
      will post one system as a follow up to this thread and Tim will post a
     
     >>
     
      second view. We leave it to the list members to decide on which method
     
     >>
     
      is the preferred route.
     
     >
     
     
      
Proposal I.

>
     
     My idea, is to break each of the magic paths into it's own skill, and leave 
     
     the
>
     
     concepts of attuned/repelled alone.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     In this way, Fire magic would be it's own skill.  So when you learned, and 
     
     cast
>
     
     a fire spell, it would contribute exp to the fire path, and your casting 
     
     level
>
     
     would be your level in the fire path.
     
      
Sounds an interesting way. It keeps the current system, only extending it.

>
     
     1) Paths that have no method of gaining experience, would either have to be
     
     >
     
     combined with other paths, or dealt with in some other manner.
     
     >
     
     
     It is indeed the most important problem to solve. Probably each spell that 
doesn't give any experience points when successfully cast should be examined 
to check which options are available.

>
     
     2) Some paths have only 2-3 spells in them.  These paths are likely going to
     
     >
     
     need to be combined with other paths, to keep them from being totally 
     
     worthless
>
     
     vs the cost to purchase.
     
     >
     
     
     Probably some Wizardry paths should be removed, or maybe some new spells 
created to fill them a little. Doesn't sounds like an impossible job to me.
 
------------------------------------------ 
Proposal II.

>
     
     The idea behind this method of handling spell paths is that every path
     
     >
     
     starts as denied, requiring characters to pay in increasing amolunts to
     
     >
     
     reach repelled, standard and attuned status in a path.
     
     >
     
     
     An interesting idea. Basically, the formula you use would be something like:
 
Casting Lvl = (Skill Lvl) + f(Spellpath Lvl).
 
Comparing this with the Garbled's system:
 
Casting Lvl = Spellpath Lvl
 
So, the only significant difference is that in Garbled's system, there's no 
global skill anymore for Wizardry.

>
     
     The major benefits of this method are a simple method to calculate max
     
     >
     
     spell points and grace
     
     >
     
     
     This is just an implementation argument, not a gaming one.

>
     
     and not having to determine a method for awarding
     
     >
     
     experience to 'non combat' spells.
     
     >
     
     
     I don't understand why it wouldn't require a method to award experience with 
non-combat spells. Spellcasters would have to be rewarded for their work in 
some way (getting points allowing them to move from Repelled to Attuned in a 
magical school). How are they supposed to buy upgrades of their magical skills 
?

>
     
     What this method does not allow is the high level of differentian by
     
     >
     
     making each spell path a separate skill category as Tim's system would.
     
     >
     
     
     True indeed.

>
     
     base cost 1 (weak / not commonly used spell paths)
     
     >
     
     -- 
     
     <snip> 
I don't like the idea of splitting spellpaths into such cost levels. It looks 
way too artificial, because it is only based on playbalance, and not on an 
'in-game' justification (Why should some magical schools be considered weaker 
than others ? Do you really want to angry the Master Mages of such schools ?)

>
     
     
     >
     
     base cost 2 (commonly used spells)
     
     >
     
     --
     
     >
     
     Null - any spell without a spell path
     
      
No spell should be allowed to be 'Null' IMHO.
 
---------------------------------------- 
Well, I'd tend to prefer the first system here. Of course, it doesn't have a 
global wizardry skill, but I think it is its only drawback. It is flexible and 
it reuses current game mechanisms instead of recreating them. It also doesn't 
impose an artificial differenciation between magical shools, relying only on 
the experience gain system to maintain playbalance.

Y. Chachkoff
------------------------------------------------
Help supporting JXFire ! (
     
     http://jxfire.sf.net
     
     )
------------------------------------------------